Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
||
{{Vital article|topic=Life|level=5|class=GA}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{ArticleHistory |
{{ArticleHistory |
||
|action1=FAC |
|action1=FAC |
||
Line 42: | Line 36: | ||
|currentstatus=GA |
|currentstatus=GA |
||
}} |
}} |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
||
{{WikiProject Magic: The Gathering|class=GA|importance=Top}} |
{{WikiProject Magic: The Gathering|class=GA|importance=Top}} |
||
{{WikiProject Board and table games|class=GA|importance=high}} |
{{WikiProject Board and table games|class=GA|importance=high}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{todo|5}} |
{{todo|5}} |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
==Judges Sexual Offender Controversy== |
==Judges Sexual Offender Controversy== |
Revision as of 17:14, 7 June 2018
![]() | Magic: The Gathering has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Judges Sexual Offender Controversy
I think this section needs to be there; WOTC, Channel Fireball, and The Judges program have issued statements and there is a history there. —Terps2008 (talk • contribs) 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, because it was a ludicrous astroturfed "controversy." WotC did make an official change, but it was a single press release which doesn't nearly rate a mention in the 25 year history of Magic. SnowFire (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- I concur with SnowFire; this doesn't seem to be significant, and it certainly wouldn't mention an entire section in the article. There is no evidence that reliable secondary sources have taken any interest in the matter; the sources you discussed are all primary sources. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Issues with Standard
The Meta is getting figured out quickly (mainly due to the web and data), resulting in infrequent card bans. Some mentioning of this I think should be in the standard section? —Terps2008 (talk • contribs) 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, players whining about the metagame is as old as the hills and common to all games - the Hearthstone article would be endless whines about the meta or demands to nerf card XYZ for example. Maybe including something in the articles Kaladesh, etc. on cards that got banned is fine, though. SnowFire (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
That's ridiculous. So players "Whining" or "Endless Whines," is the new criteria to mention it on the MTG wiki? I think at least mentioning it in the Standard section is valid. If it wasn't an issue WOTC would not be banning cards or discussing the meta. —Terps2008 (talk • contribs) 16 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.229.4.2 (talk)
- Could you provide a reliable secondary source that discusses the meta, the "speed" with which it is figured out, and the frequency of card bans that result from this? -- ferret (talk) 16:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2018
Link references to the Commander format to the Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic:_The_Gathering_Commander Cheshyrp (talk) 18:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Typo in article -- Kaldesh vs. Kaladesh.
I found this in the Product and Marketing section. I do not yet have enough authority on wikipedia to fix it, however, so if someone sees this, please fix it.
Each set since Kaldesh (Kaladesh) features two Planeswalker decks. They contain a 60-card pre-constructed deck with an exclusive Planeswalker, as well as several exclusive cards, two booster packs from the set they accompany, as well as a rule guide and a card board box with an image of the included Planeswalker.
Dactorwatson (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2018 (UTC)